Intel Nehalem. Consoles, prepare to be left in the dust.

I hope that PC gaming hardware continues the current trend of reducing in price yet getting more powerful in chip class.

This hardware means nothing to me if I can't afford it. This is, after all, Malaysia, where a Wii can cost somewhere around RM800. And considering the earnings of your average Malaysia......

its 4 cores, hyper threaded.... this is crazy....

Riki101

it was bound to happen, i think consoles were left in the dust when the 8800GT came out.

That's nice and all but how many programs are really going to use up 8 cores? My quad core cpu is more than enough for any game that is out today. I don't even think many folks will be able to afford to upgrade to Nehalem.DaGamingGod

People ask that question but it's really not about using them effectively, assuming the programs are designed to use high end processors, which there are a lot of. Programs like Aperture and the high end versions of Photoshop and many audio recording programs require much faster machines to run well. One of my friends recently bought an 8 core Mac Pro and has 4 GB's of RAM installed, the damn thing boots in like 5 seconds and programs run at insane speeds and there is no backlog in performance because of the dual quad core processors. You wind up improving load times and performance on high end software, there won't be a change in low end stuff though.

I'm glad you like to try to convince me of what to do with money that I don't have. PC gaming is the peak of retardation.usmcjdk6

Or maybe you are just a poor little child.

I'm glad you like to try to convince me of what to do with money that I don't have. PC gaming is the peak of retardation.usmcjdk6

[QUOTE="WilliamRLBaker"]So I cannot see how the consoles are being left in the dust? not when the next round of consoles will probably use this years tech in pcs, and thats next years tech.Dynafrom

Why would consoles become 10x better then what is out? They abandoned intel for inferior IBM CPU's, and that trend will stay. Fact is, desktop intel processors are too expensive to place in consoles ($200+), unless you don't mind shelling out 3k for a console.

How can it use intels tech if chances are, it won't be using INTEL. It will probably be another 100+ core in-order **** PR-hyped bs CPU like the Cell from IBM.

Can someone please put the entire OP into laymens terms? I want to understand why it's so impressive and what the heck is hyper threading?Popadophalis

As you know, the Core 2 Q9450's and up currently represent the state of the art for Intel. Nehalem (which will probably become Core 3) represents the next step up--so much so that you'll definitely need new motherboards for these processors (and DDR3 memory). But in return, the Nehalem CPUs will carry with them additional optimizations:

• DDR3 will be required because Nehalem will be the first Intel CPUs with internalized memory controllers. As shown when AMD went internal, internal memory controllers improves the operating efficiency and thus performance.
• Nehalem marks the return of HyperThreading, a technique to better employ every part of a CPU by making each CPU core look like two logical cores. Where this stands out is while the core is busy doing floating-point work, the integer unit can still be used for something else.

[QUOTE="millwrought"]This is me caring. :|Riki101

your calling him jealous ? It seems to me you were a bit quick on the jump.... Console gamers don't give a flying **** about whats happening with PC's... Console gamers just want to play their games.

[QUOTE="Riki101"][QUOTE="millwrought"]This is me caring. :|Virus214

your calling him jealous ? It seems to me you were a bit quick on the jump.... Console gamers don't give a flying **** about whats happening with PC's... Console gamers just want to play their games.

Don't speak for the rest of us please and thank you. :)

I've been gaming on consoles since I was a wee little lad and while I prefer PC gaming, I still game on consoles and I like to know what's going on on the otherside of the fence.

[QUOTE="Riki101"]

its 4 cores, hyper threaded.... this is crazy....

thegoldenpoo

it was bound to happen, i think consoles were left in the dust when the 8800GT came out.

I dunno why people think it's crazy, it was bound to happen. Xenon is a tri-core hyperthreaded...

In other news, a car is faster than a bike.

People still enjoy riding bikes though :|

[QUOTE="Fusible"]Well this is their next change in Microarchitecture since the introduction of Conroe (C2D)HuusAsking

Bet they gonna name it pentium multicore

[QUOTE="millwrought"]

[QUOTE="Riki101"][QUOTE="millwrought"]This is me caring. :|Riki101

Yeah, I'm really jealous because I play PC games too. :|

This me me caring about your reply :lol:

I've abandoned hope in humanity long ago... :(

[QUOTE="HuusAsking"][QUOTE="Fusible"]Well this is their next change in Microarchitecture since the introduction of Conroe (C2D)adamosmaki

Bet they gonna name it pentium multicore

[QUOTE="Pro_wrestler"]And yet consoles are still keeping up in terms of visual fidelity. Ecosystem Optimization optimization optimization. :)skrat_01

Optimisations capabilities is console myth, designed to make people beleive the hardware is still 'powerful', almost like 'unlocking the power of *insert console* '

Thats what I mean, and its not a myth actually. The fact that you have no OS, 3rd party software, drivers and utilities to run on consoles means you can dedicate more resources to games.

An example would be Vista, you can't even run it on 512Mb of RAM, 1Gb is the bare minimum or your going to take a major performance hit. Same with XP, task manager is reading 494 megabytes of RAM dedicated to firefox as I type this.

Developers don't have to develope for the least common denomiator discrete graphics cards that we know are more powerful than whats in consoles, X1950xtx and 7950GT(Using the ones that came out around the 360's launch). Consoles will be runing COD5 or 6 at an equal or higher level than those cards that were once head and shoulders better in terms of performance.

PC's have been more powerful then the consoles for a long time... yet the console are still doing just dandy.

Doesn't this belong in the PC Hardware forum?

Bgrngod

Kind of what im thinking

No matter how much faster or more powerfull PCs get they will never become more popular than consoles for gaming. Please Hermits give it a rest. Gaming is a casual thing now, no casual gamer is a PC gamer. PC gaming will never be popular again no matter how pretty the games get or how delusional one is as to the preference of mouse and keyboard.Ket87

Who argued or wanted that? And since when was pc gaming popular than consoles?

- Developers have complete control on games performance and visualsskrat_01

I'd rather the developers did it - they're the professionals, they have control over more than I would even if the game was on PC, and I don't have to spend my play time on it.

Thats what I mean, and its not a myth actually. The fact that you have no OS, 3rd party software, drivers and utilities to run on consoles means you can dedicate more resources to games.

An example would be Vista, you can't even run it on 512Mb of RAM, 1Gb is the bare minimum or your going to take a major performance hit. Same with XP, task manager is reading 494 megabytes of RAM dedicated to firefox as I type this.

Developers don't have to develope for the least common denomiator discrete graphics cards that we know are more powerful than whats in consoles, X1950xtx and 7950GT(Using the ones that came out around the 360's launch). Consoles will be runing COD5 or 6 at an equal or higher level than those cards that were once head and shoulders better in terms of performance.

Pro_wrestler

As I said developers find workarounds for the hardware, as the games are made for it.

Sure COD5 will run on consoles with their hardware, because the game will be designed with their hardware in mind. And of course its going to run Sub HD, with medium visuals - just like in comparison to the PC version with COD4 - as thats the scaling the developers chose - visuals per performance for the hardware.

The 360s hardware has simply aged terribly, its shared memory in particular, and the Ps3 just the same - even Kojima wasent satisfied with it (surprise surprise).

As for visuals compared to cards that the 360 is head and shoulders at.... Well actually no the visuals are comparable, especially considering Nvidias improvements with driver updates. Big difference is on the PC version of *insert Call of Duty* that system will run the PC version in HD with higher visual settings.... unlike the console version. Overclocking does make it all alot more sweeter though.

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]- Developers have complete control on games performance and visualslowe0

I'd rather the developers did it - they're the professionals, they have control over more than I would even if the game was on PC, and I don't have to spend my play time on it.

Look at games like Bully, Quake 4, Full Auto, Perfect Dark Zero - which all have framerates that dip and dive, even though the developers designed the game, and set the visuals for the hardware.

Or games like COD4 and Halo 3 that are sub high definition, and have low details - the developers set it for the hardware.

Now on set hardware this practice is logical, but in the PC gaming context the user can adjust the games visuals as they see fit for more performance or better visuals, or enough - both without sacrificing one or the other. Not to mention people can tweak settings as much as they please to find an equilbrium - using many methods.

And PC developers dont know every hardware setup, but gamesa re still optimised none the less, and after later patches, performance can increase out of sight, for many hardware configurations (see The Witcher, Stalker and Crysis).

In the PC context, you cannot change it, and in the console context, well its logical to keep it as it is, it would be silly otherwise...

[QUOTE="skrat_01"]

[QUOTE="Pro_wrestler"]And yet consoles are still keeping up in terms of visual fidelity. Ecosystem Optimization optimization optimization. :)Pro_wrestler

Optimisations capabilities is console myth, designed to make people beleive the hardware is still 'powerful', almost like 'unlocking the power of *insert console* '

Thats what I mean, and its not a myth actually. The fact that you have no OS, 3rd party software, drivers and utilities to run on consoles means you can dedicate more resources to games.

An example would be Vista, you can't even run it on 512Mb of RAM, 1Gb is the bare minimum or your going to take a major performance hit. Same with XP, task manager is reading 494 megabytes of RAM dedicated to firefox as I type this.

Developers don't have to develope for the least common denomiator discrete graphics cards that we know are more powerful than whats in consoles, X1950xtx and 7950GT(Using the ones that came out around the 360's launch). Consoles will be runing COD5 or 6 at an equal or higher level than those cards that were once head and shoulders better in terms of performance.

Sorry you are way wrong. If those cards were running the next versions of Call of Duty or any future multi-plat at the same resolution as the consoles, then I guarantee you will get way more performance out of those cards. (Assuming they are not being held back with a poor cpu or insufficient ram).